Patent litigation attorney
Casey L. Shomaker
9 tracked appearances — 7 plaintiff · 2 defendant.
Specialty & background
I'll research this attorney's background and verify the case details.
Professional Summary — Casey L. Shomaker
Focus areas. Shomaker's patent litigation practice centers on software- and telecommunications-driven technologies. Her largest tracked client relationship is with Parus Holdings, where she has worked on the voice-browser and voice-activated device controller patent family—systems that let users retrieve internet information through speech commands (U.S. Patents Nos. 7,076,431; 9,451,084; 6,721,705; 8,185,402). She also handled wireless/over-the-air printing and network output technology on behalf of Xerox in the four Flexiworld Technologies suits (e.g., U.S. Patent Nos. 10,140,071; 10,873,856; 9,036,181). McKool Smith's bio states that her pre-litigation prosecution background covered telecommunications, financial services, software, electronic hardware, medical devices, and the mechanical arts.
Side preference. The tracked record skews heavily toward the patent-owner/plaintiff side: 7 plaintiff-side versus 2 defendant-side appearances. Most of the plaintiff-side work is for Parus Holdings, a voice-technology patent owner and serial plaintiff against large operating companies (Apple, Google, Amazon, Samsung, LG). Her defense work is comparatively limited—representing Xerox in the Flexiworld wireless-printing suits. Public dockets also show her defending American Airlines in Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. American Airlines, Inc. (E.D. Tex.), so she does work both sides, but her book of business is predominantly patent-owner representation against operating companies rather than the reverse.
Firm context. She is an associate in McKool Smith's Dallas office, and all six firm-attributed appearances in the tracked list are McKool Smith matters. No prior law firm or in-house position is reliably sourced; her McKool Smith bio describes patent drafting and prosecution experience gained "[p]rior to joining McKool Smith" without naming an employer.
Notable matters and outcomes. Her most prominent work is the Parus/voice-browser campaign, which produced a genuinely mixed record: McKool Smith won a final written decision for Parus in Google LLC v. Parus Holdings, IPR2022-00279 (Aug. 2024), with the Board rejecting Google's challenges to the '705 patent, and the firm also defeated institution on the '455 and '190 patents; but the Board invalidated claims of the '431 and '084 patents, a result the Federal Circuit affirmed (70 F.4th 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2023)), and the '402 patent was held invalid under § 101 and affirmed on appeal (Fed. Cir. No. 23-2297, 2025). In Parus Holdings v. Amazon.com, a jury found no infringement, and the Federal Circuit affirmed in February 2024 while rejecting Amazon's inequitable-conduct challenge to the patent. On the defense side, the Flexiworld v. Xerox suits were dismissed with prejudice by joint stipulation in May 2024, with each side bearing its own fees. Her Parus docket roles include trial counsel, lead counsel, and backup counsel, indicating substantive courtroom responsibility rather than purely supporting work.
PTAB/IPR experience. She appears regularly in AIA proceedings. USPTO records list her (Reg. No. 77,998) as backup counsel on multiple McKool Smith IPR petitions, including petitions in the Intellectual Ventures/American Airlines dispute, and she has been part of the Parus PTAB team. McKool Smith's PTAB practice is well documented, including a firm-reported 60% win rate before the Board in 2022.
Bar and education. J.D., University of Texas School of Law (2018); B.S. in Biochemistry, University of Texas at Austin (2015). Admitted in Texas, the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern, Northern, and Western Districts of Texas, and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (Reg. No. 77,998). Recognized in Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch (2026–2027).
Note: the "notable outcomes" above are drawn from published Federal Circuit opinions, PTAB records, and firm press releases; the tracked appearance list and Shomaker's individual role in each specific result could not be independently confirmed beyond what those sources state.
Firms
Roles
- counsel4
- pro hac vice1
- trial counsel1
- lead counsel1
- backup counsel1
- defendant counsel (unverified)1
Cases (9)
- Δ defendantFlexiworld Technologies, Inc. v. Xerox Corp.defendant counsel (unverified)
- Δ defendantFlexiworld Technologies, Inc. v. Xerox CorporationMcKool Smith · counsel
- π plaintiffGoogle LLC v. Parus Holdings, Inc.McKool Smith · backup counsel
- π plaintiffParus Holdings, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc.McKool Smith · pro hac vice
- π plaintiffParus Holdings, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc.trial counsel
- π plaintiffParus Holdings, Inc. v. Apple Inc.counsel
- π plaintiffParus Holdings, Inc. v. Google LLCMcKool Smith · counsel
- π plaintiffParus Holdings, Inc. v. Google LLCMcKool Smith · lead counsel
- π plaintiffSamsung Electronics America, Inc. v. Parus Holdings, Inc.McKool Smith · counsel